Lee Bermejo and Brian Azzarello's Joker Graphic Novel

[deathfromabove]

Nah don't worry a grip of people didn't care for it. Could you be more specific though rather then just what you felt of the overall thing.

i would also like some elaboration. i mean what was so disturbing? maybe i'm just desensitized but i didnt think it was that messed up. if you compare it to some its cinematic cousins (clockwork, blue velvet, king of new york) its pretty tame.

i will agree with snake that it was dirty' though. very much the point of it though i believe.

i'm not suprised that the opinion on this is so divided though.

I typically agree with statements like: It was violent for no reason. I have to say though that I felt it was all entirely necessary in this book. I felt that the M.O. of the book was to reverse the typical allure of the Joker and demonize him as much as possible.

agreed.

it was like a character study showing the joker from a very specific point of view, that of one of his very temporary and disposable hired help.

 

[The Joker]

Why do people get all uppity about the skinning? He "stripped" the owner of a strip joint of his flesh. It was a sick joke. Very much the Joker's "style". Why do you think he's the only guy joker skinned? It was because he owned a strip bar.

I know why he did it. It's just not the Joker's style to kill someone like that. Skinning someone alive? Can you give me any other examples where Joker did something even remotely similar to that? Joker doesn't kill people like that. Shooting people, acid, toxins, electrocution, even stabbing someone with a knife. But not something as gruesome as that. No way.

I think they raised a similar point like that with the Batman/Spider-Man crossover, when Joker teamed with Carnage, one of the most twisted killers in the comic book universe. And Joker was positively disgusted at the thought of peeling someone's skin off:

Utterly distasteful and gross, he called it.

You may have a point with the rape not being Joker's usual forte, but again, we've only seen Joker through Batman's/Gordon's eyes

We have? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker beat Jason Todd with a crowbar? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker shot Sarah Essen in the head? I could go on and on. We've seen Joker many times away from Batman and Gordon. He doesn't rape people. He doesn't skin them.

We don't susually see his day-to-day, where a rape might be plausible.

He might also like to dress up like Norman Bates' mother in his spare time, but if they ever showed something like that I wouldn't buy that either.

It's nonsense. I know Azzarello was trying to show how truly evil the Joker is, but there's plenty of ways to show that without having him act out of character.

 

[Rasputin911]

I know why he did it. It's just not the Joker's style to kill someone like that. Skinning someone alive? Can you give me any other examples where Joker did something even remotely similar to that? Joker doesn't kill people like that. Shooting people, acid, toxins, electrocution, even stabbing someone with a knife. But not something as gruesome as that. No way.

I think they raised a similar point like that with the Batman/Spider-Man crossover, when Joker teamed with Carnage, one of the most twisted killers in the comic book universe. And Joker was positively disgusted at the thought of peeling someone's skin off:

Utterly distasteful and gross, he called it.



We have? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker beat Jason Todd with a crowbar? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker shot Sarah Essen in the head? I could go on and on. We've seen Joker many times away from Batman and Gordon. He doesn't rape people. He doesn't skin them.



He might also like to dress up like Norman Bates' mother in his spare time, but if they ever showed something like that I wouldn't buy that either.

It's nonsense. I know Azzarello was trying to show how truly evil the Joker is, but there's plenty of ways to show that without having him act out of character.

He sliced smiles onto people's faces in TDK (some while still living). There's your example.

Its all about how you define the Joker. You choose to give Spiderman/Batman more credence than this for some reason, so whatever.

It didn't seem out of character at all.

What your basically saying is that Joker should never do anything new. He should stick to posion gas and the occasional shooting. WHich seems pretty lame to me.

 

[The Joker]

He sliced smiles onto people's faces in TDK (some while still living). There's your example.

You're seriously comparing a couple of cuts on the face to skinning a whole body alive?

Its all about how you define the Joker. You choose to give Spiderman/Batman more credence than this for some reason, so whatever.

I chose that because it addressed nicely how Joker's methods of killing differ from a sicko serial killer's who would get his jollies from skinning someone alive. That's more akin to the likes of Carnage there, or Zsasz. Why you think Azzarello's novel has more credence when it goes against the character's behavioural history, I don't know.

I asked you has Joker ever done anything remotely that gruesome or extreme, and you cited TDK's Joker cutting a couple of lines onto people's faces. That was your comparison to peeling the skin off someone's body. Come on, man!

It didn't seem out of character at all.

*Shrug* Well, I don't know what kind of Joker you've been reading, but I've never seen him execute anyone in any kind of style like that or even remotely close to it. That's not the Joker I've been reading for years.

What your basically saying is that Joker should never do anything new.

No, I'm saying he shouldn't do stuff that's ridiculously out of character for him. Big difference. New stuff can be done without stepping out of the boundries of the character. The last 60 years of the Joker's comic book history proves that.

 

[S.D. Plissken]

Joker (the one above me) has got it correct. Yeah, I was with the story basically until he skinned that guy--it was pure shark jump. Did Rob Zombie write this ****? Is this batman or a Lion's Gate horror film? That's not what I want from a batman story. Gory BS is not good writing or being edgy--it's disgusting and disturbing for no purpose other than to rub **** in the readers face and expect them to enjoy it.

We understand the Joker is supposed to be disturbing, but he also has a certain amount of charm and charisma to him. He always rides this fine line and that is what defines him as a character.

A Joker who does coke and pops pills is not charming or cool.

Here's a little Chuck Palahniuk writing device gimmick to explain a couple more gripes:

See also--needlessly sticking gun in his own mouth.

See also--killing innocent elderly couple and laying in bed with their bloody corpses.

None of these choices are funny or interesting or add anything likeable to the character. They are ****. It's horrible storytelling.

Even if the hero of your story is a villain, you still need to have a character that the reader can identify with in some way. They had that in the Killing Joke. This is a Joker that is unlikeable and impossible to sympathize with and that is the fatal flaw of this **** awful comic.

 

[CaptainClown]

I think the entire point was that you aren't suppose to sympathize or like him. It is like many fans of the Joker, myself included. We are like Johnny Frost and are admiring this legend of crime only to see your idol to literally be insane and disgusting.

 

[S.D. Plissken]

I think the entire point was that you aren't suppose to sympathize or like him. It is like many fans of the Joker, myself included. We are like Johnny Frost and are admiring this legend of crime only to see your idol to literally be insane and disgusting.

I get it, CC, I just don't like it.

Why am I paying money to be dispointed by a character that I like. It's like the writer is saying 'well, if you really knew him, you would think he was an *******--here, buy my book and you'll see that I'm right."

Y'know Brian.....thanks, but no thanks.

PS-Oh and one more thing; Frost, along with having a stupid, cheesy ass, ******** name, is a boring emotionless passive dip**** like Keanu Reeves. He is a terribly written flat character with no commitment, or direction, or belief in anything. I'm not like that, and really, I doubt that any of us are.

 

[Rasputin911]

I get it, CC, I just don't like it.

Why am I paying money to be dispointed by a character that I like. It's like the writer is saying 'well, if you really knew him, you would think he was an *******--here, buy my book and you'll see that I'm right."

Y'know Brian.....thanks, but no thanks.

PS-Oh and one more thing; Frost, along with having a stupid, cheesy ass, ******** name, is a boring emotionless passive dip**** like Keanu Reeves. He is a terribly written flat character with no commitment, or direction, or belief in anything. I'm not like that, and really, I doubt that any of us are.

Because it enlightens people. You see tons of people walking around now since TDK came out wearing Joker shirts. Bookstores are advertising Joker comics more than Batman comics (TKJ/"Joker" are the comics on display at Borders).

The Joker's got more hero worship going for him right now than Batman does. A story like this, showing the Joker as truly twisted, sadistic, and evil, is necessary to remind everyone who the real hero is. We may like reading about the Joker, but Azzarello is saying we shouldn't be rooting for him.

I like stories where the Joker is charismatic and charming, but there are so many that this came as a relief. A breath of fresh air.

 

[Motown Marvel]

im one to believe there are no bounds to the jokers actions. if you're offended by his actions....then, good, you should be. he's a sadistic sociopath. charming? he has his moments. but tell that to the hundreds of people he's mercilessly killed all for the laugh of it. charming indeed.

 

[Killing Joke926]

So after readin' this baby a second time, I've come to my verdict:

The Joker by Azzarello and Bermejo is a book fans should be aware of what exactly they're getting into. IMO it is by far the most realistic interpretation of any Batman story I've read, which in many senses makes it very different from any other viewer would expect out of the Joker and the rest of Batsy's rouge's gallery of villians; if anything, the story's enviorment reminds me of Miami Vice with it's corrupt and left handed underworld. I find that it was a decent story with stunning artwork, and actually surpasses many standards of the average Batman novel just in execution and motivations in characterization. With that said, let's begin with the Joker:

Joker in this story is pretty much what every other fan has seen. He's very grusome and gritty on the violence scale, his quick witt personality and jokes suprisingly had me laughing throughout the story, and in flow of the story he's character that all fans should find respect for. However, I didn't really find his addiction to medication and had no motivation for butchering people to pieces; now some of them like the old couple and Tommy Bang Bang had it's overall classic Joker demenour, but other than that some of it really fell flat for no particular reason. That and him just pinching money was dissapointing due to the fact that it really brought down his emphasis on anarachy and self reliance; not the kinda Joker I would expect, but I would critisize that just because it's new fresh of the air.

Now Jonny Frost was interesting because he was the main character of story telling his thoughts of the Joker and how he was getting a piece of it all; thing is, you really don't give a s*** about this guy. He's somebody we've seen before whose kinda full of himself and just enjoys taking the highlight under Joker's wing as being somebody everybody would know; it was also kinda weird seeing of all things a Confederate flag in his room in the story, so IMO it's know doubt he was kinda racist towards Croc and some of the gang. Just a theory of mine though; overall, pretty much a character who also falls flat who none of us care about what so ever, which I could tell that was completely intentional; an easy way out to make a character, but just having him be that way just because how Azzarello had planned it that way was impressive.

Okay, since those two guys are outta the way, let's talk reinvented characters: Croc was awesome and loved how he was treated like a henchman; him also being a cannibal and sense respect and loyalty to Mr. J was something........ we could all respect honestly. LOL Riddler and Penguin were interesting portrayles of the character style wise, but none the less pretty much survive in this novel's atmosphere and actually stay true to what you'd see in the comics; easily the most adaptable and probably the best interpretations including Croc that could really make it in Nolan's world and soar with flying colors. Didn't appreciate Two-Face being kind of a Lex Luther kind of mob boss, but don't let that get by you though; some of his traits we're actually very true to the sources and found suprisingly brilliant such as him having control of half the city and especially the scene where Joker says he'd find away to murder either Harvey Dent or Two-Face; not both, but just one. Ain't that awesome? LOL Harley as a stripper was a big turn-on no doubt, but wasn't really something I appreciated in the realm of her personality; however, her having no dialouge in the story and doing things like skinning one of Jokers old time thugs alive was scary as hell. Gives a reason why Joker loves her and keeps her around: case and point, you mess with her, you don't make it out alive. And on that note, I found her to be one of the better characters for it; something I've really wanted to see from her for a long time now and appreciative that I finally saw that side of her.

In conclusion, besides some of the weaker points in story and character development, I find that it was one of the better stories out there; you just have to be a dedicated fan will to try something daring and different from anything else. Mainly, it's the perfect book for begginers who aren't aware of any Batman or Joker stories; I guarantee you they'll be really impressed by the book. Others that are hardcore traditional fans who might not find this book to be as memorable and moreover not their cup of tea; that's cool though. On my behalf, I really enjoyed this version of Joker and how he deals with the underworld; I admit some of Azzerello's execution were incomplete and background characters like Two-Face's corrupt cop who's after Jonny with the divorce papers are useless and as well as some of Joker's motivations, but it's still one fun ride. Some of it just don't take it too much to heart and I'll easily think of it as a book no fan should skip for their collection.

 

[deathfromabove]

just re read it again.

still love it.

the fact that so many conservative fans are hating this makes me love it even more. the fact that so many are actually disgusted by the joker in this makes me think that the creators succeeded completely.

of course its not the end all be all. its just one sliver of the joker. but its an element and side of the joker that i feel hasnt been explored very often. and in light of the elevated status and current popularity of the character i feel the timing is perfect for a story that seeks to erase much of the glamour and charm of comics most popular and iconic villain.

now dont get me wrong, if joker was always portrayed in this light i would miss his more traditional characterizations. but this is one trip into the dark side that i enjoyed completely.

 

[Rasputin911]

just re read it again.

still love it.

the fact that so many conservative fans are hating this makes me love it even more. the fact that so many are actually disgusted by the joker in this makes me think that the creators succeeded completely.

Haha! I didn't consider that, but it might be the best point thats been made so far.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I know why he did it. It's just not the Joker's style to kill someone like that. Skinning someone alive? Can you give me any other examples where Joker did something even remotely similar to that? Joker doesn't kill people like that. Shooting people, acid, toxins, electrocution, even stabbing someone with a knife. But not something as gruesome as that. No way.

I think they raised a similar point like that with the Batman/Spider-Man crossover, when Joker teamed with Carnage, one of the most twisted killers in the comic book universe. And Joker was positively disgusted at the thought of peeling someone's skin off:

Utterly distasteful and gross, he called it.



We have? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker beat Jason Todd with a crowbar? Was Batman or Gordon there when Joker shot Sarah Essen in the head? I could go on and on. We've seen Joker many times away from Batman and Gordon. He doesn't rape people. He doesn't skin them.



He might also like to dress up like Norman Bates' mother in his spare time, but if they ever showed something like that I wouldn't buy that either.

It's nonsense. I know Azzarello was trying to show how truly evil the Joker is, but there's plenty of ways to show that without having him act out of character.

Y'see, I look at this like it's a different universe, it's the characters from the Batman mythos but skewed if you know what I mean?

There has to be some creative liscense with the characters, it's just a different interpretation of Joker. Thats what makes Joker so great, he can be tweaked in different ways but still keep the important traits.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

With me, it's not so much how the Joker was portrayed, but the story they chose. If they went a different direction and didn't have Jonny, it could've been much better.

The Joker is exactly like Sidious. You absolutely love 'em, but when you really take in everything that he did throughout the entire Saga, you realize what a complete bastard he is.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

You're seriously comparing a couple of cuts on the face to skinning a whole body alive?



I chose that because it addressed nicely how Joker's methods of killing differ from a sicko serial killer's who would get his jollies from skinning someone alive. That's more akin to the likes of Carnage there, or Zsasz. Why you think Azzarello's novel has more credence when it goes against the character's behavioural history, I don't know.

I asked you has Joker ever done anything remotely that gruesome or extreme, and you cited TDK's Joker cutting a couple of lines onto people's faces. That was your comparison to peeling the skin off someone's body. Come on, man!



*Shrug* Well, I don't know what kind of Joker you've been reading, but I've never seen him execute anyone in any kind of style like that or even remotely close to it. That's not the Joker I've been reading for years.



No, I'm saying he shouldn't do stuff that's ridiculously out of character for him. Big difference. New stuff can be done without stepping out of the boundries of the character. The last 60 years of the Joker's comic book history proves that.

Okay, what about gassing a kindergarten? Or poisoning a load of kids with deadly cotton candy? All you people up in arms about Joker raping and skinning in this book, saying it is too extreme for him. DO ME A FAVOUR!!! The Joker would do anything, absolutely anything if he could get a kick out of it, all you people in here should know that. He is a child killer amongst other things, he was even going to massacre a load of orphan babies in No Mans Land. A bit of rape or skinning isn't going to be so extreme that even Joker wouldn't do it!

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Joker (the one above me) has got it correct. Yeah, I was with the story basically until he skinned that guy--it was pure shark jump. Did Rob Zombie write this ****? Is this batman or a Lion's Gate horror film? That's not what I want from a batman story. Gory BS is not good writing or being edgy--it's disgusting and disturbing for no purpose other than to rub **** in the readers face and expect them to enjoy it.

We understand the Joker is supposed to be disturbing, but he also has a certain amount of charm and charisma to him. He always rides this fine line and that is what defines him as a character.

A Joker who does coke and pops pills is not charming or cool.

Here's a little Chuck Palahniuk writing device gimmick to explain a couple more gripes:

See also--needlessly sticking gun in his own mouth.

See also--killing innocent elderly couple and laying in bed with their bloody corpses.

None of these choices are funny or interesting or add anything likeable to the character. They are ****. It's horrible storytelling.

Even if the hero of your story is a villain, you still need to have a character that the reader can identify with in some way. They had that in the Killing Joke. This is a Joker that is unlikeable and impossible to sympathize with and that is the fatal flaw of this **** awful comic.

I don't think you get the comic at all. Either that or you seem like you don't wanna have a open mind about it at all.

I think him doing all those pills was quite a neat little twist. Think about it, this is a guy who is constantly in and out of a mental institute, he's going to have some medication. Showing his reliance on them shows a different side to him, shows that he is human after all. The part where he is a at war with Harvey and he is in his penthouse or whatever surrounded by pills and looking all glum is quite a interesting visual, it's showing that he isn't constantly happy all the time. I like that about the book, it's nice to see a different take where he seems more human not a giggling clown ALL THE TIME.

And why do you call it needless when he sticks the gun in his mouth? Did you even read that scene? He was trying to bait Batman out. I thought that was pretty cool, the way they treated Batman. It's like he is always there but you can't see him, just how he should be from the crims point of view. Joker is claiming that he is doing Batmans "dirty work" and is wondering if he has gone too far. Of course, Joker wants to go too far to lure out his play thing, all what he does in the end, including killing the old couple, is to get Batmans attention. That's why he played Russian Roulette, he thought Batman was watching and he wanted to bait him, make him jump the gun.

But anyway, why does he need a reason to stick a gun in his mouth? He's still the Joker, he's still bat **** crazy. Maybe more so in this story. And before people start going on saying that he wouldn't rape any body or kill old people. IT IS THE FRICKIN JOKER!!!! A man who gassed a kindergarten, a man who fed poisonous cotton candy to children, a man who planned to massacre dozens of orphaned babies.

 

[Daredevil_2003]

I think it's mainly people like The Joker so much, seeing him so completely sick and depraved bothers them, even though he's done/tried to do things on a equal level before.

I, personally, do not like The Joker. In fact, I hate this damned clown. He's pretty much the definition of a monster. I like to see him, and I especially like to see the good guys foil him. He's the greatest villain ever created, IMHO. But I dont share the love a lot of fans do. He's utterly despicable, and this book removes a lot of the charm and romantic image from him. Which is a good thing. Sure, he's funny, sometimes, but he should never be likeable. Particularly in the comics, which are meant for older teens and adults, these days. No need to sugar coat anything.

I love this book in every possible way. The depiction of every character is aces. Especially the title one.

 

[The Joker]

Okay, what about gassing a kindergarten? Or poisoning a load of kids with deadly cotton candy? All you people up in arms about Joker raping and skinning in this book, saying it is too extreme for him. DO ME A FAVOUR!!! The Joker would do anything, absolutely anything if he could get a kick out of it, all you people in here should know that. He is a child killer amongst other things, he was even going to massacre a load of orphan babies in No Mans Land. A bit of rape or skinning isn't going to be so extreme that even Joker wouldn't do it!

You're missing the point entirely. If you read my posts you'd see I said the style of killing was completely off for the Joker. Nobody doubted Joker's lust for murder, or any of the victims he'd choose to kill. It's the method of murder that was off here.

He kills people using guns, toxins, poisons, electrocution etc. He does not, repeat does not peel the skin off people's bodies. And he certainly does NOT commit sexual crimes. No way.

Can you go back into Joker's history and tell me when he killed ANYONE even remotely in the style of something as gruesome as skinning them? He would find that a disgusting act, as I showed in that scan above. It was out of character for him. So was the rape. Simple as that.

 

[Daredevil_2003]

You're missing the point entirely. If you read my posts you'd see I said the style of killing was completely off for the Joker. Nobody doubted Joker's lust for murder.

He kills people using guns, toxins, poisons, electrocution etc. He does not, repeat does not peel the skin off people's bodies. And he certainly does NOT commit sexual crimes. No way.

Can you go back into Joker's history and tell me when he killed ANYONE even remotely in the style of something as gruesome as skinning them? He would find that a disgusting act, as I showed in that scan above. It was out of character for him. So was the rape. Simple as that.

Using a page from an non-canon company crossover is not the end all/be all of a character.

Skinning the guy was well within the character. It was a joke. They're at a strip club. So he made the 'strip' (smacking the dollar on his ass was priceless, IMO). I don't know how many times people have to explain it. That's what The Joker does, he kills people as a joke. Where would the humor have been if he had just shot him or fried him with the joy buzzer? It's not like he just randomly picked some dude and skinned him in a back alley. That wouldn't make any sense and be kinda off.

And the rape? It's highly debateable that he raped Barbara Gordon in TKJ, a story that most rub one off to, it would seem with all the praise (I like it, too).

 

[Ace of Knaves]

You're missing the point entirely. If you read my posts you'd see I said the style of killing was completely off for the Joker. Nobody doubted Joker's lust for murder, or any of the victims he'd choose to kill. It's the method of murder that was off here.

He kills people using guns, toxins, poisons, electrocution etc. He does not, repeat does not peel the skin off people's bodies. And he certainly does NOT commit sexual crimes. No way.

Can you go back into Joker's history and tell me when he killed ANYONE even remotely in the style of something as gruesome as skinning them? He would find that a disgusting act, as I showed in that scan above. It was out of character for him. So was the rape. Simple as that.

Yea but bro, you are missing my point. This is SUPPOSED to be different takes, it SUPPOSED to be out of canon. Fair enough some people might not like it, but it is still the Joker, he still has his main traits. His methods are maybe just different. It's like if the Bat-verse was in the 100 Bullets universe if you know what I mean?

And that panel of him and Carnage can't really be taken seriously either. Thats out of canon, it's a frickin DC/Marvel cross-over. It's the same sorta principle as this comic.

 

[The Joker]

Using a page from an non-canon company crossover is not the end all/be all of a character.

Can you offer something better from the comics to refute it?

Skinning the guy was well within the character. It was a joke. They're at a strip club. So he made the 'strip' (smacking the dollar on his ass was priceless, IMO). I don't know how many times people have to explain it.

I get the joke. I don't buy how he did it. It's not his style to kill like that no matter what the punchline.

And the rape? It's highly debateable that he raped Barbara Gordon in TKJ, a story that most rub one off to, it would seem with all the praise (I like it, too).

That's not debateable at all. If Barbara had been sexually assaulted, we'd have been told. If the victim had been found in a state of undress, which Barbara was, they'd have checked for signs of sexual assault.

When the doctor and Bullock were telling Batman what happened in the hospital, and the state of Barbara's condition, nobody mentioned sexual assault. Hardly something you neglect to mention. And not something that wouldn't haunt Barbara.

 

[The Joker]

Yea but bro, you are missing my point. This is SUPPOSED to be different takes, it SUPPOSED to be out of canon. Fair enough some people might not like it, but it is still the Joker he still has his main traits. His methods are maybe just different. It's like if the Bat-verse was in the 100 Bullets universe if you know what I mean?

No, it's not the Joker. At least those two traits were not. The rest of the book was fine. But those two acts were completely non Joker.

Canon or not. I'm all for trying new things with the character. Just don't step out of the boundries of the character.

And that panel of him and Carnage can't really be taken seriously either. Thats out of canon, it's a frickin DC/Marvel cross-over. It's the same sorta principle as this comic.

Of course it can be taken seriously. It respects the character's history. Joker has never killed anyone in any kind of gruesome fashion like that. I could completely buy that he would find it disgusting or distasteful. Is there any other Joker story that contradicts that? No.

Joker sees himself as a classy villain who kills with style and panache. Cutting off the skin from a man's body is gross, disgusting, messy, and not Joker's style at all.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

No, it's not the Joker. At least those two traits were not. The rest of the book was fine. But those two acts were completely non Joker.

Canon or not.



Of course it can be taken seriously. It respects the character's history. Joker has never killed anyone in any kind of gruesome fashion like that. I could completely buy that he would find it disgusting or distasteful. Is there any other Joker story that contradicts that? No.

Joker sees himself as a classy villain who kills with style and panache. Cutting off the skin from a man's body is gross, disgusting, messy, and not Joker's style at all.

Look, you do make some fair points. Great ones in fact. But this comic is a re-imagening, the same sorta way Nolans films are a re-imagening. Theres only be a couple of instances where Joker had a scarred smile in the comics, Nolan went ahead and implemented that in his film. Hell, he even went as far as to make him wear make-up. Sure some people didn't like it, but i'm sure they are eating their words now. Maybe some still don't like it. To me, it's the same sorta principle as this GN. Azzarello has taken the characters, gave them some new twists but kept their main traits. Whats wrong with that? I think the skinning is perfectly Joker like, but at the same time maybe his method is a new twist. It's a bad joke, you already get that I know. But what I don't get is how people find this so unnacceptable. When it comes down to it he is a sick, sick man, who finds killing people funny. What is so un-jokerish about stripping a strip club owner of his flesh on his stage and slapping a measly one dollar bill on his ass? It is still the Joker, just a different twist on him, a re-imagining, just like Nolan and Ledgers version. Still has the main traits, but some different ones as well.

 

[The Joker]

Look, you do make some fair points. Great ones in fact.

Thanks man!

But this comic is a re-imagening, the same sorta way Nolans films are a re-imagening. Theres only be a couple of instances where Joker had a scarred smile in the comics, Nolan went ahead and implemented that in his film. Hell, he even went as far as to make him wear make-up. Sure some people didn't like it, but i'm sure they are eating their words now. Maybe some still don't like it. To me, it's the same sorta principle as this GN.

Those are physical attributes you mentioned. Did the Joker in TDK do anything that seemed characteristically out of character for him to you?

Azzarello has taken the characters, gave them some new twists but kept their main traits. Whats wrong with that? I think the skinning is perfectly Joker like, but at the same time maybe his method is a new twist. It's a bad joke, you already get that I know. But what I don't get is how people find this so unnacceptable.

I don't know how many times I can say it, but I don't like it because it was out of character for him. Maybe it's an acquired taste, but seeing a character do stuff that he never normally does like it was an every day thing for him, put me off completely.

It didn't feel like I was reading the Joker in those parts.

When it comes down to it he is a sick, sick man, who finds killing people funny. What is so un-jokerish about stripping a strip club owner of his flesh on his stage and slapping a measly one dollar bill on his ass?

The method of the killing was too gross and sick for the Joker. Zsasz or someone like that would kill someone like that. Not the Joker.

That's what was so un-jokerish about it. He would find it "Gross and distasteful, too". Skinning a bloke alive? Is he the Joker or Buffalo Bill? You know, I probably wouldn't have minded it if he had gotten someone else to do it, instead of doing the deed himself.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Thanks man!



Those are physical attributes you mentioned. Did the Joker in TDK do anything that seemed characteristically out of character for him to you?



I don't know how many times I can say it, but I don't like it because it was out of character for him. Maybe it's an acquired taste, but seeing a character do stuff that he never normally does like it was an every day thing for him, put me off completely.

It didn't feel like I was reading the Joker in those parts.



The method of the killing was too gross and sick for the Joker. Zsasz or someone like that would kill someone like that. Not the Joker.

That's what was so un-jokerish about it. He would find it "Gross and distasteful, too". Skinning a bloke alive? Is he the Joker or Buffalo Bill? You know, I probably wouldn't have minded it if he had gotten someone else to do it, instead of doing the deed himself.

Well, Harley was the one holding the big bowie knife!

But yea I understand your feelings man, and I haven't got a problem what so ever. I personally liked the story and the treatment of the characters, Riddler was a bit iffy but he was literally only on like 2 pages so it's no biggy.

As for your point that Nolans Joker is only different in appearance, maybe you are right. He was pretty much completely comic book accurate in his behaviour and the like. But i still think in the medium of comics at least, there should be different ideas and interps, maybe to radical for some, but they should still be there.